Brookings Suggests Tax Reforms for Retirement Plans

According to the Hamilton Project of the Brookings
Institution, the organizing principle of the
reforms is that tax savings incentives are reduced for higher-income households
since such programs appear to be having little effect on the overall saving of
this group, with some of the revenue from the reduction in subsidies put toward
making saving easier and more attractive for low- and moderate-income
households.

The report suggests capping the rate
at which deductions and exclusions related to retirement saving reduce a
taxpayer’s income tax liability at 28%. In a statement, Brian H. Graff,
Executive Director/CEO of The American Society of Pension Professionals &
Actuaries (ASPPA), said because the tax incentive for retirement savings is a
deferral, not a permanent exclusion, the proposal would more accurately be
described as double taxation of contributions to retirement savings plans for
anyone with a marginal tax rate of over 28%.

“You won’t expand coverage by
penalizing small business owners for offering a 401(k) plan,” Graff said.
“Retirees already pay ordinary income tax on distributions from retirement
savings plans. If this proposal went through, a small business owner in the
39.6% bracket would pay an 11.6% tax on contributions made to the 401(k) plan
today, and pay tax again at the full rate when they retire.”

He added, “The Hamilton Project paper acknowledges that
individuals subject to this double taxation may decide to put their savings
somewhere other than in the 401(k) plan. What it fails to acknowledge is when
that double-taxed person is a small business owner and it no longer makes sense
for the owner to have a 401(k) plan, that owner probably won’t offer a 401(k)
plan to the employees, either.”

(Cont’d…)

The Hamilton Project report suggests
reforms that take steps to ensure more workers are covered by some type of
retirement saving plan—and increase in the tax credit that small businesses can
take for startup pension plan expenses, and an automatic individual retirement
account (IRA) program.

In addition, the report notes that
many households with very low incomes do not benefit from the Saver’s Credit
because they have no federal income tax liability against which to apply the
credit. Making the credit fully refundable so taxpayers receive the value of
the credit even if it results in a net refund from the government would greatly
increase the payoff to making contributions to qualified retirement plans for
these households, it contends.

Finally, the report says
lower-income households may be reluctant to lock away their savings in accounts
that they cannot readily access for emergency purposes or other needs like
college expenses and proposes firms offer their employees access to
nonretirement savings accounts through the same system as the one they are
using for their retirement savings accounts.